I think that those ARE the two underlying parts of interactive. It needs to be something that is dynamic to the actual game/world/story... And something that affects the character/player/players. In this way, an interactive element itself must actually be something that does a bit of both.

OK, to my an interactive element is an element which either

1. affects/modifies the game/world/story in a way that alters the worlds interaction and reaction with the player/character OR
   
2. affects/modifies the player/character in a way that alters their interaction with the game/story/world OR
   
3. A combination of the above .
   

The world may be modified so that it itself modifies the players/characters or alters its ''interaction'' and ''reaction'' with the players/characters.

The player/character can be modified so that they themselves modify the game/world/story or alters its ''interaction'' and ''reaction'' is with the game/world/story.

Is that abstract enough?

-Chris Bennett of Dwarfsoft - Site:"The Philosophers'' Stone of Programming Alchemy" - IOL
The future of RPGs - Thanks to all the goblins over in our little Game Design Corner niche
          

For some reason I keep on thinking about ''The Interactive
Element'', meaning the gameplay itself. I must be daft.

But anyway, I think an interactive element is ANYTHING that
can be manipulated by ANY entity in ANY way.

By entity i mean player or npc.

A button on your menu is an interactive element because you can
click on it.

I guess you could also say that an interactive element is
anything that can be acted upon.

So your hand is an interactive element (IE),
The shovel is also an IE,
as is the dirt.

They are all linked by actions, cause & effect style,
and you could probably also say the dirt IE is the focus of
the interaction (the Focus Element?)

Hand -Moves--> Shovel -Digs--> Dirt

is how i see your exampe.

But then again, I''m also demented

But if that is the definition of interactive, then aren''t all games interactive? By clicking a mouse or pressing a key that is interaction. I think my definition aspires more to games than yours does.

Not all games are interactive, or if they are, then I will happily kill myself with the knowledge that nobody can make interactive games!

-Chris Bennett of Dwarfsoft - Site:"The Philosophers'' Stone of Programming Alchemy" - IOL
The future of RPGs - Thanks to all the goblins over in our little Game Design Corner niche
          

Pressing a key IS interaction. It is interaction with the
keyboard. Any program / game that recieves input and acts on
it is also interactive.

Aren''t all games interactive? Yes, because to be a game you have
to be PLAYING it. If you aren''t playing then you aren''t
interacting and it isn''t a game.

Your definition of interactivity (in my worthless opinion anyway)
is the final goal of several stages of interaction. The user
clicks the mouse, the character swings the rune axe of dog poo,
the other player gets his head cut off, and something dynamic
happens to the game world.

My definition (again, in my uneducated opinion) can be applied
to all of these things. The mouse, the player''s character, the
other character are all elements that act upon each other
interactively.

Right. Because interactive is such an over-used word, I hereby move that it be junked in the same drawer as the cyber prefix.

Do I have a second?

Yeah, I thought about that too Jswing when i realized that a video is interactive because you can ff and rewind it. Its a word that''s meant for the masses not us i think. So we should ditch it a find a better word. Something more us.

Here''s a second! YAY!

One more time for the dumbies
ar+gu+ment n. A discussion in which reasons are put forward in support of and against a proposition, proposal, or case; debate.

quote: Original post by JSwing

Right. Because interactive is such an over-used word, I hereby move that it be junked in the same drawer as the cyber prefix.

Do I have a second?

Aye. Greg Costikyan says this great thing about the hackneyed word interactive, something like: "It means nothing as far as games go. A light switch is interactive. You turn in on, you turn it off. Big deal."

I''d never use the word interactive. I think it''s essential to speak plainly, to *ahem* call a spade a spade, so to speak. If you have buttons, refer to them as buttons. If you have cursors, or dragable icons, or inventory objects, I think this is what you should call them.

Even if you have a group of all of these things, I think you should refer to them specifically. I''d prefer precision over abbreviation, especially if we''re trying to communicate.

--------------------
Just waiting for the mothership...

Wavy sez that Greg Costikyan sez:
----->"It ("interactive") means nothing as far as games go. A light switch is interactive. You turn in on, you turn it off. Big deal."<------

Well, if you flip the switch, and it turns off a light halfway across the world, and you have no way of knowing that, is it interactive anymore?

I''m not just talking semantics here. This question has direct bearing on another current thread. Think about it.

I don''t want to ignore what the annon guy just said but something just popped into my head that i''ve got to raise about what Wavinator just said.

Wavinator, every word is some what an abbreviation for something larger. A flower is an abbreviation for a group of pettles, bud and stem. A game is an abbreviation for a ruleset, interface and player interaction.

But all this aside, what i''m really getting at is that its better for us to make the words we want to use when we feel the need for them rather than have some else come in who knows nothing about what we do and try to put words in our mouth. I think the word interaction is a great example of this occuring. I''m planning on using the term "game lever" or "lever" when trying to describe something that the player can use to change the course of the "game flow" or "flow". Flow will be another word that we''ll have to discuss again but for now it think the simple interpretations are relatively good enough.

One more time for the dumbies
ar+gu+ment n. A discussion in which reasons are put forward in support of and against a proposition, proposal, or case; debate.

quote: Well, if you flip the switch, and it turns off a light halfway across the world, and you have no way of knowing that, is it interactive anymore?

You changed the state of the switch. It''s "interactive". If such
a word even exists.

and interaction in a game = play.